[Essay] Bettr alone than in bad company

[Faisal Marri]

Please point out the errors.

A man is known for company he keeps, says the pithy maxim. Surely, world judges everyone on face value. If someone is in good fellows, it is because his friends are good and vice versa. But the problem is, the story goes on beyond this peculiar fact. In fact, bad company ruins a person on every side. It demolishes his character and behaviour. As man is the most habit carrying creature, he adopts the features of his favourites unintentionally if not, intentionally. If his friends are frequent liars, soon, he too will be better enough because human beings naturally are humane. They are more merciful, loving and love-seeking. They tend to do good rather bad. No doubt good company is better than being alone.

 

[Tarheel]

A man is known for the company he keeps, says the pithy maxim.

Hm.

 

[Tarheel]

Surely, the world judges everyone on face value.

Hm.

 

[Tarheel]

Re: Better alone than in bad company

If someone is in good fellows, it is because his friends are good and vice versa. But the problem is, the story goes [STRIKE]on[/STRIKE] beyond this peculiar fact. In fact, bad company ruins a person on every side. It demolishes his character and behaviour. As man is the most habit carrying creature, he adopts the features of his favourites unintentionally if not, intentionally. If his friends are frequent liars, soon, he too will be better enough because human beings naturally are humane. They are [STRIKE]more[/STRIKE] merciful, loving and love-seeking. They tend to do good rather than bad. No doubt good company is better than being alone.

I don't recognize the expression "If someone is in good fellows". Perhaps you mean: "If somebody has a good reputation...." As for sentence three, I would say that bad company ruins a person's reputation. I am not sure what you mean by "better enough"; you might want to rephrase that. Perhaps: It is better to be in good company than to be alone, and it is better to be alone than to be in bad company.

What do you think?

 

[Faisal Marri]

Re: Better alone than in bad company

I don't recognize the expression "If someone is in good fellows". Perhaps you mean: "If somebody has a good reputation...." As for sentence three, I would say that bad company ruins a person's reputation. I am not sure what you mean by "better enough"; you might want to rephrase that. Perhaps: It is better to be in good company than to be alone, and it is better to be alone than to be in bad company.

What do you think?

By "If someone is in good fellows" means if someone is in good company. In other sentences, I do agree with you.

 

[teechar]

As man is the most habit carrying creature, he adopts the features of his favourites unintentionally if not, intentionally.

The standard phrase is "a creature of habit." However, that does not imply copycat action!

If his friends are frequent liars, soon, he too will be better enough because human beings naturally are humane. They are more merciful, loving and love-seeking. They tend to do good rather bad. No doubt good company is better than being alone.

This is totally incoherent!

 

[Faisal Marri]

The standard phrase is "a creature of habit." However, that does not imply copycat action!



This is totally incoherent!

What is meant by coherence? I think pronouns are also connectors. Yeah you can say the last one was totally marooning.

 

[Tarheel]

He is talking about "better enough" and, I think "more" as used here. See definition one here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incoherent?s=t For you to use the word "more" sensibly there has to be more of something, not just more. Also, it is unclear what "better enough" means. (Creativity is good, but it is also important that people understand what you are saying.)

 

[Tarheel]

Most people probably don't know what "in good fellows" means. (Did you make that one up yourself?) Also, "habit-carrying creature" seems to be an original expression.